On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 10:56:56AM -0400, Jay Borkenhagen wrote:
> David Farmer writes:
> > I would prefer a normative RECOMMENDED, the rest of the sentence in
> > RFC2119, just means you should explain the constraints on the alternatives.
> > How about something like this;
> >
> > "The LOCAL_PREF value SHOULD be lower than any of the alternative
> > paths. A LOCAL_PREF
> > value of Zero is RECOMMENDED, however any LOCAL_PREF value lower than all
> > other LOCAL_PREF values used within an AS is an acceptable alternative.
> > The LOCAL_PREF value used, Zero or otherwise, SHOULD NOT also
> > have another use or meaning within the AS."
> >
>
>
> The LOCAL_PREF choice here is a simple thing -- don't make it more
> complicated than it needs to be.
>
> Job's suggested text says all that's necessary:
>
> "The LOCAL_PREF value SHOULD be lower than any of the alternative
> paths. Zero being the lowest value, it MAY be used whichever
> LOCAL_PREF values are used by the AS."
The above comes from Bruno's hand, I actually proposed the following:
"The LOCAL_PREF value SHOULD be lower than any of the
alternative paths. It is RECOMMEND to use 0, the lowest LOCAL_PREF
value."
Kind regards,
Job
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
